data-annotations

I have a custom validation attribute which checks to see if two properties have the same values or not (like password and retype password): [AttributeUsage(AttributeTargets.Property | AttributeTargets.Field, AllowMultiple = false)] public class EqualToPropertyAttribute : ValidationAttribute { public string CompareProperty { get; set; } public EqualToPropertyAttribute(string compareProperty) { CompareProperty = compareProperty; ErrorMessage = string.Format(Messages.EqualToError, compareProperty); } public override bool IsValid(object value) { if (value == null) { return true; }

Is there a way I can use the DisplayFormat attribute on a view model property to apply a DataFormatString format for a social security number or a phone number? I know I could do this with javascript, but would prefer to have the model handle it, if possible. [DisplayFormat(ApplyFormatInEditMode = true, DataFormatString = "???????")] public string Ssn { get; set; } The following should work, however notice the type difference for the Ssn property. [DisplayFormat(DataFormatString = "{0:###-###-####}")] public long Phone { get; set; } [DisplayFormat(ApplyFormatInEditMode = true, DataFormatString

I have a RangeValidator on a property in my model to only allow Integers that are between 0 and 100. I have a partial view that displays a form to update the property via a jQuery UI dialog. I have looked at the source and can confirm that the data annotation attributes are being generated properly. However, the validatation isn't working properly. It does perform some kind of validation, but it isn't using the range I'm setting. The values 1, 10, and 100 do not produce the error. Any other single or two digit value produces the error. However, if I pad with zeros, all values less than one

Is there a way to make a reflection for a view model property as an element with different name and id values on the html side. That is the main question of what I want to achieve. So the basic introduction for the question is like: 1- I have a view model (as an example) which created for a filter operation in view side. public class FilterViewModel { public string FilterParameter { get; set; } } 2- I have a controller action which is created for GETting form values(here it is filter) public ActionResult Index(FilterViewModel filter) { return View(); } 3- I have a view that a user can filter

Brad Wilson posted a great blog series on ASP.NET MVC's new ModelMetaData: http://bradwilson.typepad.com/blog/2009/10/aspnet-mvc-2-templates-part-2-modelmetadata.html In it, he describes how the ModelMetaData class is now exposed in the Views and templated helpers. What I'd like to do is display an asterisk beside a form field label if the field is required, so I thought about using the IsRequired property of ModelMetaData. However, IsRequired by default is true for all non-nullable properties, while it's false for all nullable properties. The problem is, strings are always nullable, so the

I am new to ASP.Net MVC 3, facing some issues while trying to implementing client side unobtrusive validation for a editor template I have created for showing date in a custom way. UI I need to show date in a three texbox UI format as I have put up a EditorTemplate for displaying the date in three parts as @model DateTime? <table class="datetime"> <tr> <td>@Html.TextBox("Day", (Model.HasValue ? Model.Value.ToString("dd") : string.Empty)) </td> <td class="separator">/</td> <td>@Html.TextBox("Month", (Model.HasValue ? Model.Value.ToString("MM") : string.Empty))</td> <td class="separator">/</td>

If you read this article on Validation with the Data Annotation Validators , it shows that you can use the MetadataType attribute to add validation attributes to properties on partial classes. You use this when working with ORMs like LINQ to SQL, Entity Framework, or Subsonic. Then you can use the "automagic" client and server side validation. It plays very nicely with MVC. However, a colleague of mine used an interface to accomplish exactly the same result. it looks almost exactly the same, and functionally accomplishes the same thing. So instead of doing this: [MetadataType(typeof